Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2146: Long May You (Salmon) Run

Episode Date: April 3, 2024

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about a grab of topics, including a team meeting after two games, early bad blood and benches-clearing incidents, the continued terribleness of the new uniforms, a Bryce Harper blooper, a missing first-base coach, an A’s conspiracy, Juan Soto as instant True Yankee, new lights at Chase Field, the Dairy […]

Effectively Wild We can talk about it to me all day long Effectively Wild Been in makeup all night Know it's gonna be a good time I wanna learn about new statistics I wanna hear about none of them RBI's, yeah Tell me about some prospect I should know about

Effect, Effect, Effectively Wild Effect, Effectively Wild Effect, Effect, Effectively Wild Effect, Effectively Wild Hello and welcome to episode 2146 of Effectively Wild, a Fangraphs baseball podcast brought to you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Meg Rowley of Fangraphs and I am joined by Ben Lindberg of The Ringer. Ben, how are you? Well, I'm recording from my new apartment for the first time. Oh boy.

And I have set up to record this podcast at the vanity in my daughter's room, which I hope will not dilute the usual bombastic masculine energy that I bring to the show, because this is not quite that setting. I don't know why she needs a vanity. She's two and a half years old. She's not like a pageant kid, but it was here. So here it is. And I'm sitting here because it was in my office and it seemed sort of echoey. And so I made a last second decision to switch to my daughter's bedroom, piled up some blankets so I didn't have to look at myself in the mirror the entire time we were recording. I'm ready to go. Are you having to like just contemplate yourself in a way that you were not prepared for? Yeah, just staring deep into my soul through the windows of them as I was recording this podcast, if I did not obscure my own image here.

But happy to be in a new place, still working out the kinks and the recording setup. But I've got a new place to live and we've got a new baseball season. It's all very disorienting, but I've got a new place to live and we've got a new baseball season. Yeah. And it's all very disorienting, but also exciting. And this baseball season seems to me that this is a precocious season so far. Stuff is happening faster than I expect stuff to happen at the beginning of a season. The Angels had a team meeting after two games. Two games.

It's too early to have a team meeting. I mean, I guess they've won a couple games since the team meeting, whereas they had lost a couple games prior to the team meeting. So, excellent meeting, everyone over there. But that's pretty early to pull the meeting cords, to break glass in case of meeting. Like, that's early. I would almost worry that I was going to the well too quickly, like it would evince a certain lack of confidence. Maybe it would seem like panic or something if I said we're meeting after two games, but I guess Ron Washington can

meet whenever he wants. Like maybe you see something and you're like, oh, I have to nip that in the bud like now, you know? And if you believe that to be true, like why, you know, let it linger? There's like a, you know, a seriousness to it that is maybe surprising to people, but might also be like kind of important tone setting, right? Like, no, we're trying to do a new thing here, you know, and I'm I'm going to make sure that we're on the right path right away. Maybe they saw everyone wondering, like, do the tungsten arm O'Doyle tweets still apply if it's just Mike Trout? And they're like, look, we got to we want to be talked about less, at least for that reason, not for Mike Trout. talked about less at least for that reason not for mike trout you know if you want to talk about mike trout less you should stop hitting home runs like to the moon seriously yes but i don't know

like i feel like we you know we imbue the team meeting with so much power and authority which is interesting because teams are constantly meeting you know meet every day, all the time. Various departments. It's a closed door meeting. Important distinction. It's not that it doesn't matter. It's that it seems so obvious that if you see something

getting off kilter, off course, that you would sit and talk about it. Having that kind of communication seems really good. If you're doing it regularly then maybe like it's it's not that each individual meeting has so much power but that you know you're you're just having an open dialogue about stuff that you want to make sure you're you know not letting get away from you you know, not letting get away from you, you know? You should meet after every game. Just rob it of any import that it has. I guess that would go against the purpose of having the meeting. But you could sort of remove just some of the,

ooh, we're having a meeting. Right. We always have a meeting, good or bad. We're having a meeting. We'll just all gather in a circle. We'll just rap a bit about how we thought that game went. Yeah. It's a preemptive move. I

guess preemptive would have been before the couple of losses, but almost preemptive. Just, you know, pull the cord and have some meetings. And they did. I would love to be able to stat blast about team meetings. I think I saw someone maybe in one of our groups suggest that. It would be great. If anyone wants to collect a record of team meetings. I don't think RetroSheet has gotten around to the team meeting record. But if we could do that, that would be fun because, of course, there's going to be some regression to the mean there. Sure. Like if you're meeting, things have not been going great.

Right. Sometimes they should have a closed-door meeting just to say, well, you know what? Things are going great. This is great. Let's meet about how wonderful the season is going for us. Just switch things up. But, yeah, if we had a record and we could stat blast that, then I'm sure you would see some bounce back. But how much of that would be attributable to the meeting?

It would be tough to say. You'd have to, like, sync that up with some projections that would be ignorant of the fact that there was a meeting and you could see whether the team just played as well as it was projected to play from that point forward or whether it exceeded its projection because its spirits were so bolstered by the meeting. It'd be a great stat blast. We just need someone to do a whole lot of research and manual data entry and send it our way. It wouldn't be the first time someone has done something like that. So that was precocious. Also precocious, we had a couple of teams mad at each other.

We had a shoving incident, benches cleared. We had the whole Reese Hoskins incident. We had multiple three-game suspensions. We had hard slides and taunts and perhaps intentional throws behind hitters. Mets manager Carlos Mendoza got his first ejection before he got his first win as a major league manager. So early. How do you get worked up so soon into that sort of froth, into that type of tizzy within the first week of the season. Don't you have some sort of opening day grace period? Hey, it's a new season. Isn't this exciting? Evidently not. You know, things go badly. You're at each other's throats and you're

meeting behind closed doors immediately. I've seen some of this sentiment, Ben, and I am surprised by it, right? Because you remember what's happened to you previously in your life, you know? I mean, sometimes— Nope. Blank slate. Just wipe it clean. New season. We're moving on. Right. Like, I guess, but, you know, the fact of the matter is that before he became a Milwaukee brewer, Rhys Hoskins was a Philadelphia Philly. And I don't know if you're aware of this, Ben, but I'm given to understand that the Phillies and the Mets, not huge fans of one another.

You know, they're not natural fast friends. There is, in fact, a good deal of animosity that is built up between those respective franchises. I know that the topic of hard slides is a controversial one, and I don't want to suggest that we should be careless with how we slide. I think it's good to be mindful of that as much as you can. Now, I do think when you're a guy like Reeves, you're a big, burly guy. You're not quite the barrel man made manifest, but you're a big guy. There comes aNeil, just like Jeff McNeil could have been a little less whiny about it, you know, for like, you know, handing out notes in that interaction.

What about the crybaby taunt that Reese Hoskins deployed? Right, because here's the thing. Reese Hoskins was very recently a Philadelphia Philly, and whatever else you might say, like like Jeff McNeil was demonstrative in his emotional reaction to the slide, right? Old habits die hard and grudges too. So, I'm never surprised when there's chirpiness early in the season because, you know, like teams build up rapport or animosity with one another and And sometimes that survives the cold, harsh winter and is reanimated in the light of spring. So I'm not so surprised by that.

And I think you get the juices flowing, you get your feelings going because it's opening day, weekend, series. It all counts now. You're invested. It's meaningful and while i encourage people to have their feelings in a way that is you know productive making it sound like a cough but um you know productive the like feelings happen and sometimes they get away from us and uh then the

bench is clear and we have to get a little fussy and, you know, just like, I think that people should be careful with their slides, uh, in addition to making them legal, like, yeah, you should be mindful about where you're throwing the baseball and, uh, and don't engage in nonsense,

you know, be, uh, try to be nonsense. But like Dylan Moore got ejected from a baseball game for tripping from the bench about Ramon Liriano swinging at a pitch that hit him and that being ruled a hit by pitch so like it's maybe it's it's catching everywhere everyone's just full of feeling in there in the early going here plus i think it should not be underestimated

and this isn't a factor in all of these instances obviously but uh it is quite cold still places and um these these men are being asked to play baseball out of doors. And I wonder sometimes if they're just cold, you know, and it puts everyone in a foul mood. Kind of like how I'm always really cranky when it's windy, because like the wind sucks. Wind sucks, you know? Like, what's up with wind, Ben? We've ranted against wind before, and we still have it out for wind. Just show yourself if you're going to be buffeting us like that.

It's cowardly in my mind. But yeah, I mean, I guess you could say that when it is hot, tensions tend to run hot also just in terms of like, you know, there are more murders when it's hot out. So when you're all bundled up. Isn't that just because we're all outside? Well, maybe it's partly that. It hasn't been that. Has that been debunked?

Yeah. I don't know. I think that like the heat probably doesn't help, but I think a lot of social scientists think that it's mostly that you're just like out and about. And so, people are interacting more often and that leads to murder apparently. It does. Yeah. That's why I tend to stay inside. Yeah.

You're afraid of murder. Can't get into nearly as much trouble there. No one's going to throw a few feet behind me. No one's going to do a crybaby taunt at me. But I think if I were on a new team, I would just shed that old team identity like a snake shedding its skin. Just new year, new team, new uniform, new me. Yeah, all is forgotten. We're putting the past behind us.

I'll develop new grudges now, but the old grudges are behind us. Because I think there are people who think of former players for their team and joke about them being kind of undercover agents for that team, even though they're no longer playing for that team. Craig Calcaterra wrote about that this week. And yeah, I think for me, you know, I'd still feel some fond feelings maybe if I enjoyed my time with a certain team in a certain city. But otherwise, fresh start. All is forgiven. We get to make new enemies now. I am sympathetic to that idea. But also, if I were Reese Hoskins and I were seeing the way

that Philly fans were reacting to me and the willingness they have to adopt the Brewers now as their central team, I would maybe just keep doing what I was doing because they're sure having a good time. And, you know, it's like, again, I want people, you know, we happen to be talking about men in this instance, and boy, should we talk about men and their feelings. But, you know, like I want people to have their feelings in a way that is productive and expressive, but not harmful to others. And like we've talked about that a lot. But I do think that some of these guys end up endearing themselves to their new organizations

by being willing to be like, you know, a little shirty, a little feisty, a little meh. Although, you know, with the Midwest, you don't know. There are polite people there, restrained. So, who knows? They might be, but they also might be like, ah, this is a jolt of feeling and excitement. You know, we love it. Just sitting here talking about toxic masculinity at my two-and-a-half-year-old daughter's vanity with an Easter basket right in front of me. Aww.

Well, you got me in the mood. Yeah, like, you know, you got to talk these things through sometimes. Well, I did say new me, new year, new uniform, but maybe that's the problem. Maybe all the players are pissed because— They're so bad, Ben. Because the uniforms, because they— some sheepishness and they have to redirect that emotion outwardly. And there's no one they can – they can't take it out on Fanatics or Nike. And so they're taking it out on each other.

It's sort of like a repressed shame at these threads that they're forced to wear in public. You tweeted about this the other day just like lest we forget. We cannot overlook that this is happening. Now, we have not gotten a full wardrobe malfunction yet. We have not seen anything that we're not supposed to see except how sweaty the Yankees are. So sweaty. And Carlos Redon. I've never seen anything like that.

Did he put a new jersey top on? He would have had to. I hope so. I think he had to because in the next inning, he looked powder dry. Yeah. But – There's no – I mean, look at the moisture wicking technology. Who knows?

Maybe it made fast work of that flop sweat he had. But just so splotchy, you know? Oh, God. I mean, some of those uniforms, those Yankees uniforms, and maybe it was like their grays on the road were like the perfect shade to show the sweat. But they wore road grays before, and I don't see that. It was some uniforms, jerseys were just suffused, like just seemed to be sopping. Like you wouldn't want to touch it. And others, it was just pools, just circles, like irregular, just not presentable.

Not big league. Not presentable. Bush league, in fact. Not even Bush league. Worse than Bush league. Whatever is below Bush League. Yeah. Rec League.

Yeah. I mean, this is part of the problem, right? Rec League is, I think, right. You know, where you have a number of things coming together, right? amateurish nature of these uniforms are the endorsement patches because it makes it look like every jersey is like a stadium giveaway, you know, like here is also we've learned that QT is sponsoring the Royals. That's separate, but they forced the Royals to give up their old uniforms to the Royals as we covered on our preview pod, they were the holdouts. They had requested that they still have the old lettering and names, and now they were forced to conform because I

guess they were making everyone else look bad, right? Like, we can't have the Royals. I don't know if that was the rationale, but maybe. I mean, maybe it's because it's uniforms and they're supposed to be uniform. You go for uniformity with uniforms usually, but also they'd be showing everyone else up. They'd be like maybe MLB, Fanatics, Nike, et cetera, hoping that we just forget, we get used to it. But we wouldn't if the Royals were there constantly reminding us. And I don't think we will either, especially if they're sweating through their uniforms disgustingly all season. It's not even warm yet as we covered. What happens when it's warm? Right. So they're sweating through their uniforms. The grays obviously don't match.

The uniform, you know, in response to my tweet yesterday, someone noted that, like, the purple on the Rockies' uniform doesn't match the purple of their hats. So, like, that's really bad. The pants remain transparent i can't remember if i brought this up on our opening day episode or uh if i mentioned it on the patreon pod but like i just like could see the swoosh on adolis garcia's like briefs i could just make out the entirety of his briefs while he's standing in the batter's box.

The tiny, tiny letters. They're so small, Ben. It's not like when they play spring training ball, they're on little league fields or anything like that. But something about the whole infrastructure of a big league ballpark. The infrastructure of a big league ballpark, the size that a big league ballpark with, you know, all the advertising and the big video board and the stands, so many people can go to these games. It makes them somehow appear smaller by contrast. Like, you are the giant and Jack is up on the beanstalk. Like, that's how far away it feels. Like, tiny, tiny little people. And you are a giant man. You know, you're a literal giant, like a mythical giant, you know, with just, like, little ant-sized, you know, teacup piglet-sized piglet people. You know, they're not pigs.

But they seem tiny like that, like a field. They are an army of field mice playing baseball with little field. You know, they live in a mushroom or like a hollowed out shoe. I guess shoes are inherently hollowed out. A hollowed out tree adjacent to a shoe that their neighbor lives in. You know, again, the patches, it makes it look like it's a giveaway. It doesn't match. It just looks amateurish.

makes it look like it's a giveaway that it doesn't match it just it looks amateurish i think some of it is the way that those uniforms are interacting with big league lights it looks terrible you know and i'm i'm encouraged ben that other people have noticed it i'm certainly not alone in this observation because um and that it it's it's still obvious up close like in person you know because i've been sick i haven't been to the ballpark yet it's really it's really bad ben it's really bad and i don't think that we're gonna get used to it i think we're gonna continue to notice because when especially the tiny letters when you're like having a really squint in to be like who is that you know sometimes you have relie squint in to feel like, who is that? You know, sometimes you have relievers come in. You don't know who that is. You're looking,

it's hard to tell who it is. It's not, it's really not right. You know, I, I remain unsettled by it, but I was going to say, I am comforted that other people are noticing and that, um, they are also feeling as if it is bad because I, I, as I said, when we were talking about it during the spring, the pants in particular made me feel insane. Because I don't want to be a person who is prone to conspiratorial thinking, you know? But also, look at them, Ben, you know? Yeah, I have looked at them, unfortunately. I'd like to avert my gaze, but I cannot. I know, it feels indecent.

You know, I just am so... And then you're watching other sports and you're like, look how normal their uniforms look. Yeah. You know? Or like, you'll watch... I mean, you won't watch college baseball. You're stubborn about this. But like, you watch college ball and you're like how big a difference is there between some of the bad college uniforms and the big league

uniforms or or you look at nike college uniforms and some of them look better than the big league unis and you're like why does the university of florida have better uniforms right now than all 30 big league teams that's ridiculous and then i was hoping that, like, you know, you'd get into, like, the Sunday alternates and it would change it. No, they're still bad. They look, the creams look wrong. They look a pale yellow almost. They aren't cream in the right way. It's so upsetting, you know.

And, again, I don't want to make more of it than it is. Like fundamentally, it is it's bad. It looks bad. It does diminish, I think, the aesthetic experience of watching the sport. But like on the scale of big league problems, right, when we look around the sport, some of the issues that baseball faces like, you know, minor in comparison to those but also just like such an indifference to how this thing that was good mere months ago and now and part of it too is that the lights at chase are brighter i i thought that they i knew that they wanted to replace the lights i just didn't know because they didn't fix the roof and so i wasn't sure if the lights like didn't make the cut either but as we as a listener informed us nick picoro reported that they didn't they didn't know because they didn't fix the roof and so i wasn't sure if the lights like didn't make the cut either but as we as a listener informed us nick picoro reported that they didn't they

didn't change the lights at chase which was good they needed to do that they have a whole led system set up now yeah they have a whole new thing but now you can really see you know the uniforms and the d-backs have new unis so it's it's all very disorienting and terrible. And we've been told it's the same, that it's not different. And I'd like to have less gaslighting around these sorts of questions. And of course, even if it were the same, a lot of people wouldn't believe them because of the ball. You're reminded of so much when you're interacting with this very simple equipment problem. It's really it's really something ben you know yeah something because it's a new problem it was not previously

a problem it is a problem that has been created out of whole cloth so to speak i guess really yeah and or partial cloth as the case may be right it's not as intractable as other issues facing the sport. I just wrote a big thing about pitcher injuries, and I'll be trying to tackle that one. That's a thorny one. That's not necessarily a one-day job. But this was not a problem, and it has become a problem. And again, I'm the last person in the world who would even be inclined to notice this because I just don't.

I just don't care that much about jerseys and uniforms in general. You have to really screw them up to make me notice or care. You've noticed. And they really screwed them up. They did. Yeah, you've noticed. They cleared the threshold for me to mind this. And yeah, even like the letters, I have talked about, we've talked about, I think we're aligned on this.

We just, we don't really know numbers, right? The letters, yeah, you want to be able to see someone's name if they have names on the back. Numbers, I just don't really retain for whatever reason. It's just not something I particularly need to know and it's not something I make any effort to commit to memory. So, that maybe shouldn't bother me, but it still doesn't look good. And now it's been long enough that probably we should have gotten over just the, oh, this is new. I'm suspicious because it's new. And that's just the way we're wired and we're used to something.

And it takes us a while to get used to something else. I think we've passed that period probably after spring training and after several games here. And yeah, that effect is just not wearing off. So it does seem to me, I don't know what the timeline will be for fixing it or rolling it back. Because again, they could just roll it back. Like they don't need to develop some new brand new expensive high tech design.

They could just say, well, we could go back to what was mostly working before and people won't be mad at us anymore. So I would imagine that if this drumbeat continues, it's incumbent on everyone to keep the complaints coming so that they don't think, oh, they'll get used to it. They'll stop complaining at some point. We can just get away with this. No, they cannot. If people continue to bring it to everyone's attention. I know that that's what they're counting on. But I feel like them counting on that indicates they've never met a baseball fan even one time in their entire lives.

Because, you know, for better or worse, these grudges, they get held and they get remembered. And you know what? They should. They should, Ben Ben because it looks ridiculous it's amateurish like what are we doing well speaking of amateurish

here I am saying it's a precocious season everyone's in midseason form we're right back into the swing of things Royce Lewis is hurt already right it's like the season has been going on for ages, except that the White Sox forgot to field a first base coach briefly. Now that's the least of the White Sox's problems, but it was sort of an embarrassing moment because there was a delay of the game because White Sox first base coach, Jason Bourgeois, He was not in the first base coach box. He was not anywhere to be found.

And the game was going on and they were waiting around for the first base coach. And eventually he ran out there and it looked like he was still putting his pants on. So I don't know if there was some sort of bathroom emergency or whether this was related to there had been a rain delay, I believe, previously in that game. And it was late in the game and it was 9-0 and the White Sox were down and maybe he was just like, yeah, if I don't go out there, would anyone really notice? And they did. But, you know, I was actually thinking to defend the White Sox in this situation. the White Sox in this situation. I honestly, if you had asked me prior to this, whether there was a rule that said you had to have a first base coach, I don't know that I would have known the answer to that question. I knew that there was a rule about where the first base coach had to stand

if you had a first base coach, but like, did they provide in the rules for just not feeling like having one? And yeah, they did. And maybe that's obvious. Maybe I would have guessed that, but I don't know that I was conscious of that rule in particular. continue to play? What if the White Sox want to engage in some slight self-sabotage here and not have a first base coach? Then who are we to get in their way? Why is there a rule that mandates having a base coach? And I posted this in the Discord group earlier, and no one had an answer for me, which must mean either that my point is unimpeachable or that no one cared or that possibly both. But it may be dumb. I don't see why it's illegal. I feel like a baseball libertarian here. I'm sticking up for your right to not have a first base coach.

Like, is it a safety issue? The base coach rules say 5.03 in the rule book. The team at bat shall station two base coaches on the field during its time at bat, one near first base and one near third base. And then base coaches shall be limited to two in number and shall be in team uniform. And then finally, base coaches must remain within the coach's box. So what if we just change that? The team at bat shall station to base coach? May? Could we make that a May station? And then it's optional. And, you know, there wasn't even anyone

on first base. No one needed to be coached at the time. It was the start of the inning. So let's get Roland. And, you know, if he's ready at some point, if he feels like making an appearance, okay. Or you could even say it could be like the ushers at a play. It's like you have to wait for an intermission. You missed your chance at the top or bottom of the inning. Now you've got to wait until the teams change sides if you want to go out there. We can't have you just strolling out there during the game. That could be distracting.

Right, yeah, dangerous. Who's it hurting other than potentially a runner if you get a runner on? And it's the White Sox, so you might not even get a runner on. Baseball libertarianism sounds terrible. Oh, boy. Well, I guess, you know, men need astrology, too.

So, I'm not wrong about that. I wonder if maybe part of what they are trying to mitigate is well one what you're talking about they don't want there to be a while the ball is in play insertion of the base coach into the situation so maybe part of it is to prevent that i do wonder if some of it is like guarding against managers trying to play a game like under protest or something. Like they don't want to say that they were at a disadvantage and weren't allowed to. But some of it is just like, hey, like the rules of baseball

require this number of players on the field and these coaches. And, you know, we can't begin play until those conditions are satisfied i definitely get the players part that that does seem pretty important to me yeah this is like going back to we entered a listener email about just what if you didn't have base coaches right i'm not suggesting that we should but just abolish base coaches. I'm just saying, if you choose to forego your base coach, then you shouldn't be punished for that other than through whatever loss you're suffering due to the absence of the base coach. That's my position. Well, I think that maybe, here, let me offer an alternative theory of the sort of philosophy

behind this particular rule, which is that, and I know that you are sometimes of the opinion that like players should have to fend for themselves out there more than they, than they have to. But let's assume that we grant that a base coach is in theory quite useful to players. And the idea behind playing a baseball game is that you are endeavoring to win it. And so you should have to field a competitive squad up to and including the coaches that can help players maximize their play on the field. And so the reason we do it is because you are not allowed to play a substandard game. That's embarrassing for the sport. So get it together. You know, maybe that's the idea. Yeah. If base coaches became optional, Jerry Reinsdorf would probably say, great, I've been waiting for this. No longer need base coaches.

Yeah. I guess, what was it? Episode 2069, that hypothetical. It was about a traitorous base coach. Yes. Yeah. I mean, like, I do not remember the episode number because I'm, that would be insane. But I do remember the hypothetical. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Well, in that case, you'd definitely be better off without one. But, you know, I think it is handy to have numbered episodes, even though we have thousands of them at this point. Agree with that. Yeah. So much easier to refer people to episodes, to find episodes if everyone just had the title but no number. And sometimes I worry that people will be scared off by how big the number is. Again, maybe some of them will be reassured.

Okay, this is not a fly-by-night operation. They're not going anywhere. They're not like a White Sox first base coach that might just not show up one day out of the blue. But also, gosh, that's a big backlog. That's a large library to try to catch up on. But I think it is very helpful in an archival sense, I think, and in an episode discovery and linking sense. So I guess I'm glad we did that oh yeah i'm i'm glad we did that because look i like to think that our um jokes that we make in the titles are like completely comprehensible both in the moment and years later but like absolutely are they not so um we we should have titles uh numbers and titles and make it easy for folks to find things. I just can't be counted on

to remember which episode involved which thing. That would be, I mean, it would be pretty impressive candidly, but. Yeah. And this way we know which things came after which other things, because if the number's higher, it was later. You know, you have dates. That helps too. So here's my favorite conspiracy theory. Have you made yourself aware or been made aware of the A's conspiracy theory that players are being punished for showing support for a fan group that some mysterious behavior on the part of the A's here, could have some secret explanation or origin because Estiari Ruiz was sent down, which was curious, right? Because he was off to an excellent start this season. I mean, it was just a few games, but it was kind of weird

if you're going to start the season with him on the opening day roster and then he has a few good games for you. Why then decide that he needs to go down and work on getting on base? So that was one. And then podcast friend, former guest, Brent Rooker, did not start two of the A's first four games. And, you know, they're not rich in great hitters.

And so that was kind of curious. There didn't really seem to be any particular reason for it. And then it turned out that they had been wearing wristbands to show recognition or support for one of the fan groups, Last Dive Bar, that has been doing demonstrations. I don't know if this is like a tongue-in-cheek conspiracy theory or not, but A's ownership, you know, they're limiting their Twitter replies, right? Like, I could imagine that they might get kind of petty about their employees expressing some form of silent support even for the people who have been righteously mocking A's ownership. So if it were to come out that that were the case, I don't know if that would be like a grounds for grievance sort of situation.

Seems like potentially it could be. But that's my new favorite conspiracy theory because I'm willing to believe provisionally almost anything about John Fisher and co. And that seems like the sort of self-sabotaging behavior that they might engage in. And if not, then it is just sort of weird that they chose to send down Ruiz after he had a hot small sample start. I don't want to feed conspiracy, but I also don't think that it would be unprecedented for um teams to have a little bit of they do retribution sometimes sometimes there's some retribution maybe it's this it can it can also be like and i'm not saying this with like

inside info or anything like you know you piss off your manager in some way um and a like a statement they decide a statement needs to be made you know point has to be proven and so like it wouldn't totally shock me but it would be pretty dumb especially because like whatever we want to say about Ruiz and his play uh as a big leaguer thus far like who traded for him? You played him all spring. He broke camp with the big league roster. So, what? He hit about as poorly in spring training as he hit in the majors last season.

But then he was off to a 429, 375, 857 start. That's a very strange slash line, but very Ruiz-esque. So yeah, it's the A's you wouldn't really notice, I guess, maybe unless it were a team like this that you always kind of have to question everything that they do because, you know, you can't really give the A's the benefit of the doubt in terms of ownership, management, etc. It's not so dissimilar from the pants or the baseball, right? fans, with your employees, with the media is that there are going to be moments when maybe you have a perfectly justifiable reason for behavior that strikes folks as odd, but just because they don't

understand what the underlying rationale for the decision is. If you have a pattern of having been, you know, sort of not above board about this stuff, you're not going to be extended the benefit of the doubt, even if there is a perfectly rational explanation. And so, you know, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to understand what those reasons are, because it's not that, you know, bad actors don't always act badly every single time. And you want to make sure that you're properly diagnosing the institutional rationale for a decision. But this is what happens when you are weird about the ball. People are going to be like, why should we believe you about the pants? We remember how you acted about the baseball,

you know, like it's the same thing with the ace. So, there you go. And ace ownership seems to be bad actors in multiple ways, right? Like bad as in ill-intentioned and also bad as in incompetentent. So this could be either of those things or neither, but we'll be watching. It's caught my eye. Another nice thing about this season and its precocity is that we already got an all-timer of a blooper. And I think it's come up on the show before

that maybe bloopers aren't as big as they used to be. Just, you know, bloopers used to be big, right? And maybe it was because we had more national coverage. You had like this week in baseball and people were seeing the same sort of bloopers all the time. Of course, now, you know, they circulate on social media still. And this one certainly did. The Bryce Harper attempt to catch a foul ball over by the Phillies dugout, and he just did like a end-over-end tumble in there. And then the ball landed maybe like 10,

15 feet behind him, like on the field, which looked incredibly humorous. It looked as if he had wildly misjudged this ball and had, which is, I think, among my favorite genre of bloopers, like when the outfielder loses it in the lights or the ceiling or something, and they run, they sprint into a certain spot, and then it lands way behind them. That can be embarrassing, but also funny. This was obviously not that. It was a product of the netting. This ball hit the netting and then it bounced back onto the field,

but you could not see the netting in the camera angle in the frame of the clip that was circulated. And so it looked like Bryce Harper had just full steam ahead into the Phillies dugout, just laying it all out there to try to catch this ball. And it was nowhere near him. And so context-free viewing of this clip, I think, will entertain many people and may lead to besmirching of Bryce Harper's defensive reputation. But first time I saw this, I did a double or triple take because I did not understand. It took me a minute to figure out what was going on here. And I thought it was a legitimate misplay and was highly entertained. Also slightly worried for Bryce Harper, but he's okay. Slightly? I was very worried. Yeah. I mean, it looked really bad for a while there.

It did. It was like full contact, head over heels, which in a sense, like once you found out that he was okay, made it even more funny if you thought that he had misjudged the pop-up by that much. Yeah. And that's not what happened, though. No. I wonder, though, because he must have thought it was really close. So I wonder, though, because he must have thought it was really close. I wonder what the trajectory of that ball was where he thought he really had a chance and so was going all out.

And yet it bounced that far back onto the field. I guess there's some springiness. I'd like to see the full trajectory of that play. I don't know if StatCast tracked that one, but quite amusing. Yeah, I don't know if StatCast tracked that one, but quite amusing. Yeah, I don't know. I will admit to being too wrapped up and being nervous that he was going to have broken his face, but yeah, it was weird. The visual

of it was very strange. It was very strange. It took me a few viewings to take in all these different aspects, because the first time, I thought it was about oh no, he hurt himself catastrophically, and then it wasn't that, and then I saw the ball I thought it was about, oh, no, he hurt himself catastrophically. And then it wasn't that. And then I saw the ball and thought it was, oh, he just made an oopsie. And then maybe on the third viewing, I logicked it out and figured out what happened here.

But for the second viewing, at least, I quite enjoyed myself. So, well done, Foul Ball and Bryce Harper for giving us some brief entertainment. Glad you're okay. Logicked, logicked it out. Did you socialize it to your friends after that, after you had logicked it out? So, Chase, the new lights, you have not seen them in person yet. I have not. By all accounts, much better looking. And we did get a question from listener Christian who is asking about the performance difference, if any, of this and whether maybe it would be beneficial to batters there that they can now see the ball.

I don't know if it rises to that level of like it was tough to pick up the ball before so much. It was just sort of gloomy looking. Yes, I agree. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you've spent a lot of time there, obviously. So I don't know whether you think, you know, like it was up to big league standards, right? It wasn't like this is unsafe or people aren't going to be able to see the ball.

I mean, I think it was up to a big league standard. I don't know if it was still. By definition, it was. Right. It was a big league standard. I don't know if it was still... By definition, it was. Tautologically, it was a big league ballpark. I suspect that it was one of those things where it was technically in compliance with big league standard or they would have had to do something about it sooner, but that they had fallen behind sort of what the average array looked like.

And certainly, when you play in the world series and people are complaining about it being difficult to like kind of track what's going on in the game i think it provides a pretty powerful incentive to to update stuff and like you know i'm not i don't want to give you know kendrick a pass on some of the goofier stuff he said this spring about relocating the team or paying for things but you know it's like, it's hard to see my team play in the World Series. I'm going to probably need to do something about that. There's still other work to be done in that ballpark, to be sure. It's sure nice.

It's like very bright. But now their whites are like so, wow, the unis are just so bright. They almost look washed out, you know, because of how bright it is. It's kind of something. There definitely were performance effects and impairments in early night baseball for the first few decades. The lights were not as effective as the sun. So there were definitely differentials there. Like if you look, I think, at the day-night league-wide splits, teams did hit significantly more homers and scored more runs during day games for the first few decades, at least, of night ball. So I think that disparity didn't really disappear until the

late 70s or so. And you do still have maybe cooler temperatures typically at night, but there's basically been no split in recent years, although it had persisted until pretty recently in the low levels of the minors, which was something J.J. Cooper showed a few years ago that there wasn't really any day-night split league-wide in AAA, for instance, but in low A, where the lights were the worst, there still was. Although I guess those teams, what used to be the low A teams got contracted after 2020 anyway, so problem solved. No more day-night split because no more affiliated teams and affiliated leagues. But yeah, I would guess that Chase was dark by modern big league standards. But I don't know if it was so dark previously and so bright now that we will suddenly see some big boost for Diamondbacks bats at home. Maybe that negative run differential last year is all because they couldn't see the ball so well. No, I doubt there will be some big effect. But it is nice at least for spectators,

both at home and on TV. Definitely a nicer, brighter look. Nicer, brighter look. Now you just got to fix the roof and Chase will be good to go. Also improve the concessions. I do have some notes actually, I think is the takeaway here. Yeah. Also, I think Juan Soto is a true Yankee now. I think it took four or five games. He has been so warmly embraced. I'm just, you know, I'm sensing the pulse of my fellow New Yorkers and just walking around the city. Everyone's just shouting praises, just zanas to Juan Soto.

There goes Torres to third pitch. Line base hit! Left field! How do y'all like that? Torres scores. The Yankees take a 4-3 lead. Oh, is he good! Oh, the we love Soto!

He helped the Yankees to a four-game sweep of the Astros, and that's obviously going to endear you to Yankees fans, any of whom still hold a grudge against the Astros. Not that's obviously going to endear you to Yankees fans, any of whom still hold a grudge against the Astros. And not all bad news for Houston. They got a great heartwarming no-hitter from an improbable source in Ronel Blanco filling in for injured starters. But that was against Toronto. They needed the Yankees and Juan Soto to leave town. He had that clutch throw that we talked about last time, and he's not even known for that. Okay, can we, can I,

the way that this throw has begun to be talked about, it got the job done, Ben. You know, why can't we leave it at that? Why do we have to, it was fine. It wasn't amazing. It wasn't amazing. Why are we? It was sufficient.

It was not coming from someone you expect to give you Sterling outfield defense. Correct. And he has worked on that, clearly. He has decided to work on his defense, and maybe he will indeed be better. But, yeah, it was a well-timed play more than anything else. Uh-huh. Okay. I just, again, I'm not trying to, I don't want to harsh anyone's vibe.

It's the legend of Juan Soto. It's been building already. I'm not trying to yuck anyone's yum, but I am trying to say that, you know, we know what like really good throws look like. And I don't know if this would be on that highlight reel. Yeah. And that's all we have to say. I'm not, it got it done. It got it done.

It got it done. Yeah. But people are talking about it like. This is like a Yankees classic. Like it's the one Soto game, you know. And if he goes on to have a storied Yankees career that lasts for more than one season, then maybe that will be the case. But he also has done what he is known for doing, which is being really good at hitting. Right.

just reeling off a winning streak to start the season and Juan Soto playing a big part in that. Just really sort of all the New York is, can you play in New York? It takes someone special to play in New York sort of stuff. Not that anyone was questioning Juan Soto's capacity to play in New York specifically, I don't think. But you get off to a slow start as he did in San Diego. And who knows how that changes how you're received, especially if you are seen as something of a mercenary potentially. You didn't jump at the chance to sign an extension and stay in pinstripes forever. You might test for agency. Wait. I'm sorry.

Do people view him as a mercenary in New York? He was traded for. No, he was traded for, yes. But I'm just saying, you know, you get off to a slow start. And like, he's been asked about, you know, do you want to stay here long term? He's done what anyone would do in that situation, or most people would do, which is, you know, looking forward to the season, we'll see what happens sort of commentary, right? Right. looking forward to the season, we'll see what happens sort of commentary, right? Right. So I'm just saying that if he had started in a slump, let's say,

then perhaps that could have colored how the rest of his season was received. But instead, it's all hail the conquering hero already. Sure, yeah. And that's preferable, you know? I agree. It's sort of silly to decide whether you like a player and want that player on your team based on a few games, especially a player with the track record of Juan Soto. But, you know, New Yorkers, and I am one, we can be provincial. And I don't know that I have this particular feeling, I hope, but I've done work to try to correct it. I hope, but I've done work to try to correct it. But, you know, the famous New Yorker cover where just the country ends basically at the edge of Manhattan or whatever.

Like, you know, sure. I heard that Juan Soto guy. I heard he was pretty good in other places. But, you know, it doesn't really count until you do it on the biggest stage with the brightest lights. Not the Chase Field bright lights, but the Yankee Stadium ones. And now there's just no doubt he's been embraced. He's a true Yankee.

He helped engineer an Astros four-game sweep. And now it's just a question of how much will they pay to keep him around. And also, I think fans are maybe discovering just how fun Juan Soto is as a spectator experience because he is probably – he's as fun as you can be without being a really well-rounded player. Yeah, I agree. highlight as Yankee was a defensive one, but he's not going to give you the base running highlights, usually the fielding highlights that other players are going to give you. And so he's somewhat limited in that capacity, but he is as entertaining as you can possibly be at the plate. And you might not think that because someone who walks 20% of the time, you might think that would be boring.

And maybe it would be boring if he did not give us a show every time. If he was not so expressive, so demonstrative. If he was not doing his shuffle. If he was not spitting on pitches. If he was not contorting his face into interesting expressions. If he was not sort of, you know, pounding his chest when he does something good. Like, the guy is just fun to watch and a new fan base is discovering that now. Yeah. I would never claim that New Yorkers invented the concept of

provincialism or regional chauvinism, but I will say that many are quite committed to the idea. You know, maybe we leave it at that. If we haven't pioneered it, we've perfected it because we're New Yorkers. Right, I know. I think I've said it before, but I do think that if a bigger subset of the population there took that John Updike quote a little less seriously, God would let the Jets be good. But, you know, here we are. Anyway, I'm happy for Yankees fans that they now know that Juan Soto is good and that he's good for them. It's an exciting experience to get to know a superstar,

especially when you've been deprived of a second player, at least, who gives you that sort of offensive impact. I was going to say, literally Aaron Judge plays for the New York Yankees. Yeah, those poor Yankees. They've just never really had any superstars in the past, you know? They're just finally getting to experience what that's like. I'm trying so hard. I'm trying. I'm just really trying so hard, so hard to be, you know, I want to not get emails i i want to acknowledge what like

it is a special place it is a cool place uh whose mayor i never want to hear about ever again but like a cool it's so cool and it is like an important city not only to this country but like to the world and i want to acknowledge all those things. And then I encountered the takes about sports there. And I feel like I'm being tested by some sort of divine entity, you know? Yeah. We talked about the New York exceptionalism stuff a lot in the context of Joey Gallo. And there was a piece by Neil Payne at FiveThirtyEight about a decade ago, trying to sabermetrically examine the idea

that some players don't perform as well in New York and more so than in other cities or whether it's a big city thing. And there seemed to be like some very, perhaps light support if you squint for that hypothesis. But yeah, I think we mostly make too much of it. It's like are we remaking Defending Your Life and I didn't know about it? Am I in it?

Like, and am I Albert Brooks? Good movie. It is a good movie. It was a good movie. Another thing I was contemplating, since you came out strongly in favor of Humpy last time, and Humpy— Please say more words than that. And enunciate them clearly. Yeah. You came out in favor of the Mariners' salmon run promotion that they're doing between innings. And Humpey is one of the salmon.

But someone, I think, in our Discord group brought up something that now has made the whole thing morbid for me, which is that the actual event of a salmon run, what happens at the end of that is, I mean, you know, there's spawning that happens. And then there's dying that happens. There's a circle of life. And now that has kind of colored my impression of the salmon run because you wouldn't want that to happen at the end of a between-inning ballpark promotion. You would not want to see spawning,

and you would certainly not want to see the salmon perish at the end of the run. So this is probably a case where it's good to take some creative license and not perfectly represent the natural event that this is depicting. But yeah, you know, if your kid asks you about the salmon run, then it's going to be an eye-opening explanation from what is so lighthearted a ballpark event. Well, right. But like, you know, they can just call friends in the city of Milwaukee

and be like, so how have you talked about the anthropomorphized wieners' fates with your children? Because they have little hats too, you know? That's true. Yeah, the Salmon Run is really great, though. I find a lot of ballpark stuff chintzy,

and I've kind of reached a point where I'm no longer amused by like the minor league stuff anymore um you know where it's like ah we gotta make the zaddy cow for this you know yeah it's like first of all i'm sorry i'm gonna do a big swear and shane's gonna bleep it but you're gonna know what i'm talking do people think we want to the cow like what are we doing here you know like again this is where i'm like there is a meeting you know that there's a meeting in the in the process of bringing this marketing to to bear where someone's like okay so how horny can we make people with the zaddy cow you know right um what's our level of comfort with that How much do we want to lean into the furry thing here, right? So, you know, I'm kind of over it, but I really just unequivocally, genuinely

love the salmon run. I love it. And you're right. There is a circle of life to it. But Ben, you know, it's an important part of the ecosystem in the Northwest, and so I think it's a good learning opportunity for kids. But I'm here to tell you, you're suspending your disbelief anyway because salmon don't have computers or septum piercings. I don't know, do they have septums to pierce? Salmon septums. That's a good band name, though. Yep, salmon have septums. They do?

Wow. Okay. But they don't have tablets. So, you know, win some, lose some in terms of the believability thing. I felt the same way about the Dairy Daddies because I saw some people saying, when are Ben and Meg going to talk about the Dairy Daddies emergency episode to talk about the Dairy Daddies? No. And look, I don't want to spoil anyone's fun. If you're horny for the cow, that's your business.

Yeah, I didn't bring it up previously in order to dunk on it and plant a flag and say, I don't care for the Dairy Daddies. I don't care for the Dairy Daddies. I enjoyed for a moment the Dairy Daddies expression. I don't know if you would call it coy or maybe it's just i guess it's just a sexy expression it's just kind of a come hither whoever did the graphic design for that particular aspect of it i i say kudos to them but as we've discussed dairy daddy's down that's that's obvious yeah you know yeah that's pretty clear yeah you get that message from the visual language here conveys that without even knowing the name. But as we have discussed in the past with some of the minor league names that are just like lab designed, they're just engineered to go viral in a way that I find kind of unbecoming.

You know, I mean, that's not to say that there is. Yes. Sorry. of unbecoming, you know? I mean, that's not to say that there is... Yeah, sorry. That there's... See, that was not an intentional thing that I said. And I was not going for it. And thus, maybe it was more funny. I'm not saying it's not funny to try to be funny intentionally. There are comedians who are great at that.

But there's something just sort of sweaty. Comedian is a category of job, which is how you know that people trying to be funny works out sometimes. Yeah. There's just kind of a reverse engineered market focus tested kind of quality. There's a company that does a lot of the minor league team names and just mashes up like an animal and something about that city. And then it's like, what is a trash panda or what? You know, like some of these names are entertaining, but there's just such a template for them. There's such a format.

And I just feel a little bit manipulated into finding that funny. And you feel that way because you're being manipulated. Yes. I don't think that you're, that way because you're being manipulated. Yes. I don't think that you're, you know, you're not off the mark with it. Yeah. And I mean, you know, you tell someone a joke, you're manipulating them into laughing, I suppose, from a certain point of view. But this just feels, I don't know, it just doesn't feel genuine, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. There's something about it that's just kind of clout chasing, I guess.

Like, you know, I'm not mad about it. I'm just not particularly entertained by it. I'm not either. I think that some of the moments of like sports horniness, right, that we have seen in the last couple of years that have been fun that we have delighted in on this podcast have been either earnest in a way that is like different than this or the best ones have been accidental right like i genuinely don't think that anyone thought through grand junction chubs like i don't think anybody i don't think anyone thought about that, you know? And that's why it was funny. That's why it was so funny. And then they took such

offense to it, made it so funny. Because they didn't name the team Grand Junction Chubbs in order to make us laugh. Quite the opposite. Exactly. They were offended that someone had suggested Grand Junction Chubbs. How dare you? Yes. So much funnier. So much funnier. Yeah, because it was unintentioniction Chubs. And that made it so much funnier.

So much funnier. Yeah, because it was unintentional. Exactly. And so I don't want to go so far as to say that it feels like it's appropriative, but it's closer to that than anything that is going to inspire a genuine reaction. I don't know. It's just like it feels off kilter. And it's, I don't know. I don't. But's i don't know i don't but not in a fun way you know not in a cool way in a way that's like why are you trying to why

are you trying to make us horny with the zaddy cow yeah that's not your thing that's that's the sexy cow communities thing yeah you know and it's like i don't know for i don't i don't like it ben it feels feels manipulative and i know that like marketing is manipulative just like by definition they're doing their job they're doing their job well it got a lot of attention they did get a lot of attention and the non-horny marketing is just as manipulative and it sells just as many hats or maybe fewer hats but it sells hats too like that's the purpose right is to sell the hat with a little logo on it so i you know i don't want to make too much of it but i also some like kind of exhausted by it you know it just isn't i don't know do something fun and create like the the salmon run

thing felt more organic and not just because it involved fish, you know? One follow-up. We talked last time about Nelson Cruz retiring as a mariner. As a mariner. He won't be taking part in the salmon run. So far as we know. Yeah. Maybe he'd be welcome to get inside that suit.

But he did an honorary ceremonial one-day contract, retire as a team thing, and we talked last time about how his career trajectory was maybe sort of unusual or his choice, his selection of team. And he was embraced by the fans in Seattle. He liked playing there. He was good there. He changed his reputation, perhaps, like they gave him a contract, like there was a lot of faith in him shown by that organization, etc. So makes sense on a personal level, but also seemed semi-unusual just for a well-traveled player to choose a team that he was not on as long as another team, that he was on another team twice as long as he was with that team. That was earlier in his career. He didn't play as well, et cetera.

And it was not like the last team he played for or anything. So I sort of threw it out there. Is there a comp for someone else who had a similar selection of team to retire with. And by far the most popular one was Bartolo Colon, which we talked about at the time, but I think we talked about it mostly because it was weird that he had done the honorary retirement like five years after he'd last been a big leaguer. Right. And I know he was playing elsewhere and he was maybe still active in his mind, at least. But usually you see it right at the end of the career, like, right, right.

Like he's just finished playing. This is his first season not playing. And so he is going to do the retirement now as opposed to several years from now. And that was the outlier aspect of Cologne. But a bunch of people pointed out also sort of, I guess, similar that he chose the Mets to retire with. And again, it was like he was embraced by the fan base and he really liked it there

and he played well, but did not play as well or as long as he had in some other places. And so I guess in that sense, it's a pretty good comp. He had the third most years with them because he was with Cleveland twice as long as he was with the Mets. So it was sort of similar in that regard. But he had 4.7 war with the Mets and like 23 wore with Cleveland and then also more with Oakland and then also more with Chicago. So in that way, it's even weirder than Cruz, I guess, because the Mets were further down the list of career value produced, except for, I guess, the fact that the Mets at least came closer to the end of his career in sequence. They were not the last team he played with, but they were close. He had that one weird season at the end where he played for Atlanta and Minnesota and Texas. And I barely remember any of those things happening.

But I will take baseball references word for word. It was at least recent enough that no one was going like, Bartol Cologne was a Met. The way that some people were saying, oh Bartol, Cologne was a Met, the way that some people were saying, oh, right, Nelson Cruz was a Mariner. I don't even really remember or associate Nelson Cruz with a Mariner. Plus, like, Cologne had so many highlights with the Mets and the home run.

The home run. Maybe his signature moment, quite honestly, not even exaggerating. Which is so funny. Yeah. So it made sense in some ways, but I guess that is probably the best comp for Cruz. Yeah. I think that that's a good, I think that's a very good comp.

I do feel saddened that so few people remember Cruz's, you know, tenure with Seattle. But, you know, they didn't make the playoffs while he was there famously. So that might have had something to do with it. Right. He was there famously, so that might have had something to do with it. Right. And some people were sending suggestions like Jeff Nelson, for example, to name another former Mariner. He retired as a Yankee.

Now, I have fond memories of watching Jeff Nelson during my youth, and he played more for the Mariners, longer, and also accrued more war with the Mariners. But he won four World Series with the Yankees. Yeah. So, that'll do it. If you win four World Series. That'll do it. Totally. And it's like close enough in every other category.

Yeah. And, you know, you were part of the bridge to Mariano trademark. Like, that probably is going to be more memorable in your mind. Apologies to Seattle, but Jeff Nelson did not win a World Series with the Mariners. Oh, wow. Yeah, so that made some sense. And then last thing, I guess, is that there is a new entry in the annals of selective switch hitters, which was something that we talked about last season because Tommy Edmund had been doing it.

Remember, Tommy Edmund had gone from exclusively switch hitting to switch hitting sometimes or most of the time, but not all the time. And that was kind of curious because usually most guys are not sort of half in, half out with the switch hitting. Right. You know, you'd think it might be disruptive to do that because you kind of want to get the same look and the same angle. Like the switch hitting is disruptive if we are offering notes. Yeah.

But if you think you're getting the platoon advantage, then you would want to keep getting it. But Edmund was kind of doing it on a case-by-case, game-by-game, pitcher-by-pitcher basis, like where he felt comfortable or thought that his swing matched up better from a certain side against someone. And he did it fairly regularly that he would deviate from the norm and kept that going because it's like it's happened with knuckleballers in the past. knuckleballers in the past. Yeah. You know, that's pretty common or it might be some isolated thing, you know, Mariano Rivera or just someone with some sort of stuff that someone made that executive decision with one pitcher, but not just kind of case by case. And that is now happening with the Yankees and with Oswaldo Cabrera, who is now doing some selective switch

hitting. He has not given up on switch hitting, but he is sometimes hitting left on left now. And it's based in part, at least on analytics, whatever that means, that nebulous catch-all term. But he's not like a great hitter from either side, or at least hasn't been. Excuse you, he has a.238 WRC+. What do you mean?

He's one of the best hitters in baseball, clearly. Yes, it's just the proximity to Juan Soto has transformed him into a better hitter. But usually you're not going to do this if you're a great hitter, obviously. It's usually a sign that things have not been going great for you if you want to switch it up. Yeah, you're tinkering in a way that is meant to spur better performance than what you've been exhibiting. So it's worked out okay for him so far.

It's surprising because he actually did it against Josh Hader the other day. He took a left-on-left plate appearance against Josh Hader, who's one of the hardest lefties to hit. I mean, not that it's easy for right-handed hitters to hit either, but you'd think like, gosh, my job is tough enough. I'm not going to make it even harder here. Yeah, totally.

I'd be curious about what the analytics based argument for that was exactly. I'm sure there was some sort of rationale, but yeah, this is something I'm tracking. tracking selective yeah switch hitting on the one hand like it feels like it should be less surprising to us than it necessarily is because we know that teams are doing you know regardless of the handedness of the hitter well not regardless of the handedness of the hitter stick with me you're gonna get what I mean in a second.

The teams are looking beyond mere handedness when determining matchups, right? That they are thinking about not only, you know, when you're setting a platoon, what side of the plate does the guy hit from? But like how, you know, what is his bat path? Does he have, you know, does the path of his barrel through the zone match up well with this particular pitcher and what that guy throws maybe we have him in the lineup today right so it's going beyond just like you know do we want him to see same-handed pitching or not in that respect it would make some amount of sense that like their analysis and decision making around you know when to deploy switch hitters and in what circumstance would also become more sophisticated. But also, it doesn't happen very often still. It

still is a pretty rare occurrence. So, yeah, I think it's worth tracking, Ben. I think it's worth keeping an eye on. And it doesn't necessarily surprise me that a team like the Yankees might be one where you would see more experimentation there and you know if you're Cabrera you're like well um as Meg mentioned I'm currently one of the better hitters in baseball and while Juan Soto is getting a lot of attention as well he should let us not forget the role that I played in our hot hot start. Maybe they'll be really good for a while and Yankees fans

will be happy and we'll hear us from them. You can stop right there. I'm going to reject that notion. Yankees fans will be happy. That's all I have to hear. They might be quieter. Like, as a population, it could be a thing that they try.

Like, maybe they can try it out, you know? It's the spring. It's like you're emerging from your chrysalis and you're like, I'm going to try a new personality, you know? Well, that's what I was saying at the start of the episode. I was saying, fresh start. Everyone should be happy and get along. But not so much, apparently. Although, part of what—I'm sure that Yankees fans would be thrilled with their team starting 5-0,

regardless of who had been sort of the primary recipient of those losses. But clearly, the fact that it came mostly at the hands of the Astros is fueling some of the jubilation. So, they're not really turning over a new leaf either, are they? No. All right. I'm going to take us out with a little stat blast here. The ticket data set sorted by something like year and minus for OPS plus And then I'll tease out some interesting tip and discuss it at length and analyze it for us Amazing ways

Here's to day Step up His praise is today's steppes. Today's steppes. Okay. I was curious about the number of first-time opening day starters we saw this past opening day, because there were a lot, because a lot of the presumptive opening day starters were not available. Yep. They were hurt, yes. Yep. And so there were some fill-in first-time guys, 15, in fact, 15, half of the opening day starters had never started on opening day before they had started. To be clear, they had started games, but just not opening day games. So this

was a simple one, but I asked Ryan Nelson to query this one for me just to see how unusual that total was. 15, is that weird? Is that high? And yeah, it is. It is not unprecedented. A lot of these things, they typically fall into the category of, yeah, you know, if it caught your eye, there was probably something semi-notable about it, but not unprecedented. And it was not unprecedented. However, it was the third highest total of the 30-team era. So since we have had 30 teams going back to 1998, there were 18 first-time opening day starters in 2003. And there were 18 first-time opening day starters in 2020.

And 2020, everything was weird. I mean, that was an opening day that started in July. So that was wacky. But this is the most, other than that, in this era, the average is 11.4 in this 30-team era. So this was 50% of teams had a first-timer here. And if you do go back into earlier eras, Ryan just gave me ALNL era,

so 1901 modern era, so to speak. And obviously, if you just look at that, then it looks like 1901 is all first-time starters because that was the first year in this data set, I guess, so we can throw that out. But disregarding that, there were still some years, like 1914 had 13 first-time opening day starters with 16 teams. That's pretty wild. That's a high percentage, 81.3%. I don't know if that's because there was, I guess, Federal League action confounding things here somehow. But obviously, you had 16 teams for

a very long time, and you did have 13 opening day starters in 1944. There was a war on, so that explains that. And you had 15 opening day starters, first timers in 1978 when there were only 26 teams. So that is a higher percentage than we had this season. And there were 16 out of 26 in 1987. So that is almost 62% of opening day starters that year were first timers. But yeah, of opening day starters that year were first-timers. But yeah, that's, I guess, the record percentage. 18, the record total. So it was a lot, but it was not the most.

Okay. All right, then. Next little stat blast. This was also a Ryan Nelson special here. I was curious about Jesse Chavez, who reunited with Atlanta yet again. He is in a constant state of becoming a Brave, no longer being a Brave, just going back and forth. And listener Scott asked us whether it was a record that he was acquired this many times by this one organization,

and he said he'd be shocked if it hadn't already been stat blasted, and indeed that has already been stat blasted. So in episode 1780, which I think this was prompted by Rich Hill being reacquired by the Red Sox yet again. But we counted that time, I think that six was the most times being acquired for one player by one organization. And I think this is Chavez's fifth distinct stint with Atlanta because the Braves claimed him off waivers in August 2022 and then re-signed him in free agency that November. So by the way we defined it, that doesn't count as separate stints.

He didn't go somewhere else in between. So he's one short of the record for one player being acquired by one team. But I was kind of curious about just how much better he has been as a Brave than as anything else, because it just seems like the Braves get him, he pitches great for them, then he goes somewhere else, he doesn't pitch so great for them. He has historically pitched way better as a Brave on a career basis than he has with any other team,

and it's not an insignificant number of innings. It's 141 games, 161 innings, and he has a 3.07 ERA with Atlanta, 138 ERA plus, compared to 98 ERA plus as a whole, 4.3 ERA. So his ERA with Atlanta is more than a run better than his career ERA. And thus, you know, the other teams, if we were just to subtract the Braves from his stats, they'd be even worse than the average. So he has performed way better as a Brave in a smallish but not minuscule sample. And so I asked Ryan to see if he could come up with any comps.

So he looked for players who have at least 200 career innings, have played with a team between 10 and 90% of their games. Chavez, it's not a fluke thing. His ERA and FIP have both been, I think, a run better with the Braves than his overall marks. So there are 57 examples of players having both an ERA and a FIP more than one run better with a team than their overall career marks. The top of that list by ERA margin with that team is Ryan Brazier with the Dodgers, but that's a very small sample. That's like 38 innings because he was one of the Dodgers reclamation projects where he was bad and then he went there and he was good.

What else is new? So by that standard, Chavez is only 42nd all-time, and the best by FIP margin would be Scott Aldred with the Rays, who had only 55 or so innings there, but was 1.65 Yare and Fipp better, I think, with the Rays than his career marks. But arguably more fun answer, Andrew Miller in second place with the Yankees, 107 innings. So he's 46th by that mark, Chavez. But Chavez has 158 innings with the Braves, which is the ninth most innings with a team to meet this one-run-better ERA FIP or requirement. So by that standard, if we factor in his innings, then it actually is fairly impressive that he has done this.

And it actually is fairly impressive that he has done this. And I guess the most that you get maybe is Tim Belcher. Tim Belcher with the Dodgers. So he had 806 career innings with the Dodgers out of 2,442 career innings overall. And with the Dodgers, he had a 2.99 ERA and a 3.17 FIP, and his career marks were 4.16 and 4.27, respectively. So he had a gap of about 1.1, 1.2 better with the Dodgers in 800 innings. So if you set the minimum as many innings as Chavez, that would be the record. But Chavez, ninth on the list. So it's Belcher with the Dodgers, Greg Olson with Baltimore, Vern Kennedy with Cleveland, Arthur Rhodes with Seattle, Mariners legend Arthur Rhodes. Phil Regan also with the Dodgers, Darren Oliver with the Angels, Edwin Jackson with the White Sox of his many teams and many stops and many employers.

Edwin Jackson effective with the White Sox of his many teams and many stops and many employers. Edwin Jackson effective with the White Sox. Then Jarrett Wright with Atlanta. And then Jesse Chavez and Paul Quantrill with the Dodgers rounding out the top 10. So, yeah, if you've been that much better, you know, just why mess with a good thing? Just stay, right? If you're Jesse Chavez, you know, you've reached an advanced age as a baseball player. Seems like things are working out when you're with the Braves. So might as well continue to be in business together. No kidding. And finally, we had a question in our StatBlast

group and channel in the Discord group for patrons where people were wondering about a weird game where teams scored more runs than they had hits, but it was both teams that did it. So the Angels and the Orioles, the Orioles beat the Angels 11 to 3. So the Angels scored three runs and had two hits, and the Orioles scored 11 runs and had 10 hits. So sort of weird, right, that both teams in a game would have more runs than they had hits.

And so Tex Paisley, who is a listener Patreon supporter of ours, he has a RetroSheet database now and knows enough SQL to be dangerous. So took it upon himself to do some stat blasting here. And I am taking it upon myself to report his results here. So he found that the Orioles-Angels game in question was the 38th time that this has happened. So it is fairly rare. Now, both teams have had at least two more runs than hits on five occasions. And on one occasion, both game to have more runs than it has hits. That has happened, I mean, that happened 97 times last year. It's happened more than 5,000 times total. But it is quite rare for both teams in the same game to do it.

And Tex, having done that little stat blast and stumbled across that one game where both teams had three more runs than hits, he emailed us to say, is this the worst MLB game ever played? And hat tip to Jay Kuda, also the high-volume shooter here, who quote tweeted a tweet about that Orioles-Angels game and established that the most recent time this had happened was April 18th, 2021, when the Mariners beat the Astros 7-2, and the Mariners had six hits and the Astros had one hit. That brought this to a wider audience. And so Tech said, he queried Regersheet, he determined this has happened 38 times, as I said, and that both teams have scored at least two more runs than they had hits five times.

And then that one occasion, April 18th, 1953, the White Sox beat the then Indians seven to six in a game where each team scored three more runs than they had hits. I looked up the game on Baseball Reference, Tech says, and to my satisfaction, it was as weird and bad as expected. reference, Tech says, and to my satisfaction, it was as weird and bad as expected. The game featured seven hits, six errors, 26 walks, and 25 runners left on base. My curiosity peaked further. I used my Chicago Public Library card to access the Tribune archives and find an article about the game, which I've attached here. And of course, we will link to on the show page. Headline, Sox beat Indians 7-6 in walk and error comedy. Somehow the article

makes the game sound even worse than it appeared on the baseball reference page. A brief rundown of the action. Cleveland scores one run in the first inning in normal, if uninspiring fashion, run driven in on a ground out. The Sox score five runs in the bottom half, including two runs scored on errors, one a ball dropped by the catcher at the plate, and one run walked in. Cleveland scores five runs in the top of the second, which started with three walks to load the bases, a hit driving in two, then another walk. The Sox starter was removed. The reliever came in and immediately threw a wild pitch, allowing the runner from third to score, and then gave up two more runs on infield ground outs.

The Sox tie the game up in the fourth inning in relatively normal fashion, scoring on a single off a Cleveland reliever who came in after the previous pitcher walked the bases loaded. The Sox did not get another hit the rest of the game, and Cleveland got only one more hit in the sixth inning. The Sox won the game in the bottom of the eighth on the Cleveland got only one more hit in the sixth inning, the Sox won the game in the bottom of the eighth on the following sequence of events. The inning opens with a walk to Ferris Fane, Mini Mignoso bunts and collides with the second

baseman, covering first base, allowing Fane to reach third. On the next at-bat, Rocco Rocky Kersnich grounds to the third baseman who throws home in time to beat Fane, but Fane scores after the catcher drops the throw, his second drop throw of the day. In addition, the article notes that the weather was freezing. Well, that makes sense, I guess. And the game lasted for three hours, 22 minutes, a long time considering the American League record at the time was three hours, 35 minutes. In sum, it sounds like this game was miserable for everyone involved and it led me to wonder, is this the worst

major league game ever played? I've certainly never watched a game like it. You know, that's a good question. I don't know how we would determine that. That's a whole stat blast in itself, probably. But it's got a strong case. This does indeed

sound bad. It feels like it'd rank at the very least. Like, that sounds terrible. 26 walks, six errors. Oh, my gosh. You would just feel, like, so frustrated after a while. It would be the ultimate, oh, come on, game, even if it's not the worst game ever, you know?

Yeah. These teams weren't even bad is the weird thing that year. Cleveland finished second in the AL with a 92-62 and 1 record. And the White Sox were third in the AL, 89-65 and 2. So when I saw

this, I thought, oh, maybe it was truly terrible teams playing with this sort of line score. No, not really. But just having a bad day and a cold, uncomfortable day. And I guess baseball's not played well in those kinds of conditions. This is what I'm saying. People get grumpy. Yeah, I guess so.

All right, just Ben now. And I forgot, I have a fourth and final stat blast for you. It's amazing. Once the season starts and people are actually watching baseball regularly, we get way more stat blast requests and suggestions. This one was prompted by a trade. Question from listener and Patreon supporter Reggie. In light of the three-way trade announced among the Rays, Marlins, and Yankees, what is the three- or four-way trade with the least combined war in MLB history? The trade in question was consummated on March 27th.

John Birdie was traded from the Marlins to the Yankees. The Yankees sent minor leaguer John Cruz to the Marlins. They also sent Ben Rortvedt, who should have been on my list of jacked players recently. That guy's got some forearms. To the Tampa Bay Rays, the Rays sent Shane Sasaki, minor leaguer, to the Marlins. So the tally of career war produced to date by the players in that trade, 7.4. All the positive war comes from birdie. So Reggie wants to know least career war involved in a three or more team trade. I put this to semi-frequent stat blast consultant,

Kenny Jacklin of Baseball Reference. This is not career war through the time of the trade. This is the career war of all the players in the trade combined by the time they retired. So cumulative career war of all involved. This Rortvet-Birdie trade, currently pending their further contributions, is the sixth least consequential three or more team trade in history. Just like the idea of three or four teams getting together, deciding to do a deal, and none of the players involved ever amounts to much. So the five three-plus team trades with fewer career war involved. December 29th, 2020, Jose Alvarado traded as part of a three-team deal with the

Rays to the Phillies. The Dodgers sent minor leaguer Dylan Paulson and a player to be named later to the Rays. The Phillies sent Garrett Clevenger to the Dodgers. Number four on our countdown, December 8th, 1976. Jim Dwyer traded as part of a three-team trade by the Mets to the Cubs. The Cubs sent Pete Lecoq, yes, to the Royals. The Royals sent a player to be named later to the Mets. The Royals sent Sheldon Mallory to the Mets

to complete the trade. That won 3.7 career war total. The Clevenger-Alvarado one was 4.2. Now for our topper, bottom three, all sub-replacement level. So June 3rd, 1989, Jose Mota traded as part of a three-team trade by the A's to the Padres. Padres sent a player to be named later to Cleveland. Cleveland sent Peter Kold, a minor leaguer, to the A's. The Padres sent Brian Brooks, minor leaguer, to Cleveland to complete the trade. That came to a

grand total of negative 0.4 war. Number two, recent one, so still some time to change. December 16th, 2022, Hoy Park was traded as part of a three-team trade by the Red Sox to the Braves, who sent to play to be named later to the Red Sox. The Soxves, who sent a player being named later to the Red Sox. The Sox sent Jacob Wallace, minor leaguer, to the Royals. The Royals sent Wyatt Mills to the Red Sox. And finally, the least war ever involved in a three-or-more-team trade goes to a deal done on March 31, 2006. Freddie Bynum traded as part of a three-team trade by the A's to the Cubs. The A's sent John Reinecker to the Rangers.

The Rangers sent Juan Dominguez to the A's. The Cubs sent John Caranca and Cash to the Rangers. Negative 1.1 war. Full results linked to on the show page as always. By the way, speaking of the Dairy Daddies, in Danville, Virginia, in the Old North State League, I've just been made aware of the Malmo Oatmilkers. Oatly, the world's original and largest oat milk company,

is bringing the Malmo Oatmilkers to minor league baseball. The announcement of the league's 121st team is part of the oat milk company's ongoing multi-year partnership with the league as its first ever national plant-based non-dairy sponsor and pays homage to Oatly's home city of Malmo, Sweden. All of minor league baseball's already existing 120 teams will each play one game this season as to Oatly's home city of Malmo, Sweden. All of minor league baseball's already existing 120 teams will each play one game this season as the oat milkers, making the

oat milkers more than just the 121st team of minor league baseball, but also an occasion for players to wear non-generic, but also non-outlandish pink accented jerseys for nine entire innings. And to that, I say, how dairy they. To support puns like that, you can go to patreon.com slash effectively wild and sign up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount to help the podcast keep going, help us stay ad free and get yourself access to some perks. The following five listeners have already signed up. Daniel J. Carroll, Neil Jabot, Austin Kluen, Christian Abke, and Sean Rosales. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only,

monthly bonus episodes, one of which we just released over the weekend. We really let our hair down on those bonus pods. They take some turns. We only talk a little bit about baseball,

but you're missing out. You also get access to playoff live streams, prioritized email answers, discounts on merch and ad-free fan crafts memberships, and so much more. Patreon.com slash effectivelywild.

If you are a Patreon supporter, you can message us through the Patreon site. If not, you can contact us via email, send your questions and comments to podcast at fangraphs.com. You can also send your intro

and outro theme submissions. New funky one today, courtesy of Austin Kluen. Thanks to him. Love these themes. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify

and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash Effectively Wild. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify and other podcast platforms. You can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at EWPod. And you can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash Effectively Wild. Also, the first Effectively Wild listener meetup at an MLB ballpark this season took place over the weekend in Seattle. The attendees shared a photo. Sounds like a great time was had by all.

If you're interested in attending a listener meetup at another ballpark this season, check the last links on the show page to find your city and sign up. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We will be back with another episode a little later this week. Talk to you then. Thank you.